Architecture and Public Policy

Related Projects

Related Topics

CIS explores how changes in the architecture of computer networks affect the economic environment for innovation and competition on the Internet, and how the law should react to those changes. This work has lead us to analyze the issue of network neutrality, perhaps the Internet's most debated policy issue, which concerns Internet user's ability to access the content and software of their choice without interference from network providers.

David Segal is the executive director and co-founder of the activism organization Demand Progress, and in that capacity also runs the anti-plutocracy group Rootstrikers. He previously served as a member of the Providence City Council and as a Rhode Island state representative. He ran for Congress in 2010, backed by much of the "netroots", organized labor, and the Rhode Island progressive movement.

Shaheen Shariff, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Integrated Studies, Faculty of Education, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Dr. Shariff's research and teaching are grounded in the study of law as it impacts educational policy and practice. In particular, she is interested in studying legal issues that emerge in relation to on-line social communications such as cyber-hate, cyber-bullying, sexting, free expression, privacy harm, libel and criminal harassment.

Lauren Turek is a doctoral candidate in history at the University of Virginia and a dissertation completion fellow at the John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics at Washington University in St. Louis. She specializes in the history of U.S. foreign relations, politics, and 20th-century American evangelicalism. Lauren is currently finishing her dissertation, entitled “To Bring the Good News to All Nations: Evangelicals, Human Rights, and U.S.

When FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced last week that he would eliminate the "fair play" rules known as Net neutrality, he took a step that some economists and technologists worry will eventually lead to the monopolization of Internet services in America. What, if any, impact would the elimination of Net neutrality rules have on consumer privacy? The answer, in short, is that consumers would simply be forced to pay more for it.

We are inventors, entrepreneurs, engineers, investors, researchers, and business leaders working in the technology sector. We are proud that American innovation is the envy of the world, a source of widely-shared prosperity, and a hallmark of our global leadership.

The post below is an open letter to European citizens, lawmakers and regulators, from our founder and Web inventor Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Professor Barbara van Schewick, and Professor Larry Lessig. Join the conversation in the comments below or on Twitter using #savetheinternet or #netneutrality.

This week in San Francisco, CPJ's Technology and Advocacy teams will participate in RightsCon 2016, an annual conference focusing on human rights and technology. Organized by digital rights group Access Now, RightsCon is one of the most important regular gatherings on technology policy, and the conference has been the site of effective discussions around issues that affect journalists and journalism. We expect this year to be no different.

Pages

Comcast Corp. v. FCC is a 2010 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia case holding that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have ancillary jurisdiction over Comcast’s Internet service under the language of the Communications Act of 1934. In so holding, the Court vacated a 2008 order issued by the FCC that asserted jurisdiction over Comcast’s network management polices and censured Comcast from interfering with its subscribers' use of peer-to-peer software.

In 2005, on the same day the FCC re-classified DSL service and effectively reduced the regulatory obligations of DSL providers, the FCC announced its unanimous view that consumers are entitled to certain rights and expectations with respect to their broadband service, including the right to:

"Eshoo and her copanelists, Federal Communications Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, Reddit CEO Steven Huffman, and Stanford law professor Barbara van Schewick, remained doggedly optimistic about the future of net neutrality in the United States."

"Van Schewick argued that the motivation for removing net neutrality rules came largely from ISPs looking to capitalize on their positions as gatekeepers. She said that in 2013, prior to net neutrality regulations being put in place, six large ISPs started using “choke points” to slow down certain games and and videos, only speeding them up if the hosting websites were willing to pay.

“The ISPs have more money, and they definitely have more lobbyists,” Schewick said. “But that does not mean they get to win. They only win if we are silent.”"

"Thomas Lohninger, executive director of Epicenter Works, another NGO that ran an ostensibly grassroots campaign against the Copyright Directive, says his group worked with politicians from across the spectrum. “You can find allies in all political parties, and if you are working toward the majority, you also have to talk with all of the people and explore all avenues that you can in order to gain a majority. And that's what we did,” Lohninger says. “There are of course the Euroskeptics, that are fundamentally opposed to every type of European legislation or regulation.

Cultural Events Board is proud to announce that Valarie Kaur will be the first out-of-state Sikh American to come speak to our campus regarding hate crimes against Sikh and Muslim American following 9/11.

The days are numbered for federal net neutrality regulations. In response, some states are working on their own versions to prevent internet service providers (ISP) from blocking, slowing or charging more for some web traffic. Oregon, Washington and several other states have made new rules, but a bill working its way through the California legislature would go the furthest. Marketplace Tech host Molly Wood spoke with Ryan Singel, a media and strategy fellow at Stanford Law School, about how a state can regulate a business that crosses state lines.